If your houseguest (POTUS) began inviting strangers to come live in your house (the U.S.), you’d call the police. From Investors.com:
…more than 90,000 children…crossed the Mexican border into the U.S. and were apprehended this year, and the more than 140,000 [are] expected next year…
Instead of sending them back home to their parents, Attorney General Eric Holder made it a priority to hire taxpayer-funded lawyers for them.
[Actually, it seems that 90,000 are expected this year, as my headline states. 40,000 were caught last year. See my update below.] The article asks why Republicans are pushing for amnesty – before August. The writer believes it’s because “Democrats use immigration to smear Republicans as racists,” which allegedly scares cowardly Republican politicians.
Whoever is running U.S. political theater has Democrats playing savvy manipulators, while Republicans play witless dupes. Perhaps Republican politicians are meant to represent the rest of us, modeling the desired reaction to their psyops, such as:
Obama is equating immigration law enforcement with cruelty to children in the public’s mind.
At the heart of amnesty is the North American Union, the so-called conspiracy theory that is, like most so-called conspiracy theories, a real plan, the truth of which governments and mainstream media try to suppress. From the New American:
In short, nothing less than an epochal socioeconomic meltdown is likely to furnish the political camouflage for dissolving the borders between the United States and her northern and southern neighbors.
If your houseguest didn’t like you, or was hired by others to destroy (“change”) your way of life, by inviting multitudes of uninvited guests into your home, the houseguest would cause you and your family to suffer socioeconomic meltdown. However, the manipulative houseguest asks, “How can you refuse to house the children? If you turn them away, what will the neighbors think?” And he sneaks them in while you’re at work.
UPDATE: Here’s more info on this problem, as a critic (my very own troll, I’m flattered) has submitted two lengthy emails in which he calls me a liar. He is a liberal who often criticizes my posts. Unfortunately, he often gets his facts wrong. To save him embarrassment, I will not publish his most recent comments.
Regarding the number of children crossing the border. From a Washington Times editorial:
The numbers of these children making the treacherous journey are much higher than the Obama administration has acknowledged, according to reporting by our Stephen Dinan. The deputy Border Patrol chief, Ronald Vitiello, said in an internal memo on May 30 that border agents caught 40,000 unaccompanied children last year. They expect to apprehend 90,000 children this year, and 142,000 in 2015.
According to PBS.org:
The number of children found trying to cross the Mexican border without parents has spiked in recent years. Between 2008 and 2011, 6,000 to 7,500 children per year ended up in the custody of the Health and Human Services Department’s Office of Refugee Resettlement. In 2012 border agents apprehended 13,625 unaccompanied children and that number surged to more than 24,000 last year…
Last month the Office of Management and Budget said in a two-page letter to the chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee that the increase in the number of children crossing alone would likely cost the government at least $2.28 billion, about $1.4 billion more than the administration had initially asked lawmakers to budget for its “Unaccompanied Alien Children” program.
Who’s to blame for the mess? From the editorial:
President Obama, whatever he intended, is largely responsible. Lured by lax immigration enforcement and the promise of citizenship as “dreamers,” the Obama children’s hour is changing the mission at the border from ensuring security to providing emergency assistance. Last week, the president declared the border an “urgent humanitarian situation.” He assigned the handling of the influx of children to Craig Fugate, administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which customarily provides relief following natural disasters.
FEMA will take care of them? From a Washington Times article:
In a draft memo dated May 30, Border Patrol Deputy Chief Ronald D. Vitiello warned that the all-hands-on-deck effort to manage the flow of children is distracting the Homeland Security Department from other critical parts of its mission, including going after gunrunners, drug smugglers and adult illegal immigrants.
Back to who’s to blame. From the Christian Science Monitor:
A recent wave of migrant mothers with children, as well as unaccompanied children, crossing the US southern border is, to President Obama, an “urgent humanitarian crisis.” To critics, the surge of humanity on America’s doorstep stems at least in part from Mr. Obama’s own policies that appear to lay out the welcome mat for illegal immigrants.
With the surge in needy immigrant families, makeshift camps are springing up at Arizona bus depots, and the US is opening military barracks in Texas to house the growing number of unaccompanied children.
According to press reports, rumors are flying throughout Central America that parents won’t be detained by the US Border Patrol if a child is by their side. That’s true, for the most part. They are sent to live with relatives, or anywhere else, until their deportation hearings (usually within 15 days)…
“The word has gotten back that [the Obama administration] is letting people stay – not just unaccompanied minors, but women with children – which is creating an opportunity to sneak in and get while the getting’s good,” says Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, which backs “low migration.”
Why wouldn’t they want to come here? From the editorial:
Coming to America now means getting free citizenship, free health care, welfare benefits and even an Obamaphone. Illegal aliens crossing the border into Texas say news reports in their Central American homelands encourage them to risk the journey northward with the promise that if they make it to the U.S. border, they won’t be turned away.
Who’s telling them that? Is it the same people who promised the same and more to American citizens in order to get the current POTUS elected?
As for the children. From the Christian Science Monitor:
Overall, illegal immigration from Central America is now inching toward 180,000 people a year – about half of the flow at the 2005 peak, but up from 130,000 two years ago.
Children are about 10 percent of that flow, and as many as 70 percent of those children are unaccompanied, Brown-Gort says. Many of the children are 12 and older, and most are boys. At home, boys that age are chief targets of cartels, and rising violence is pushing them to head north.
From the L.A. Times:
Nearly three-quarters of the youths apprehended are male, according to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Immigrant advocates say they see more young children crossing, as well as more girls. Last year, 24% of the youths were under age 14.
I understand that most of those who come to the U.S. do so in the hope of a better life for themselves and their families. Many, perhaps most, are hardworking, good people who would be assets to their new country. They are not the problem. The problem is the U.S. government, which is using these particular immigrants as pawns in their political games. The problem is that they are being used to destroy U.S. culture and economy.
That’s why Eric don’t-go-there-buddy Holder is recruiting lawyers to find legal loopholes that will allow the children to stay. Isn’t it easier to turn children and young adults into anti-American globalists than their adult counterparts? According to the Washington Times:
“We’re taking a historic step to strengthen our justice system and protect the rights of the most vulnerable members of society,” Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said in a statement announcing the plan…
Under U.S. law and regulations, they are supposed to be transferred from the Homeland Security Department’s custody to the Department of Health and Human Services, which is supposed to look after them and try to either connect them with their families or place them in foster families.
The legal program will cost $2 million and involve about 100 AmeriCorps members…
He said the immigration lawyers in particular can review each case and see whether the children already qualify for some legal status — in some cases, they may actually be the child of a citizen parent, for example.
They may also have a valid claim they can make for asylum based on conditions at home or for Special Immigrant Juveniles status, which is available to children unable to reunite with their parents.
The AmeriCorps volunteer notice specifically lists both asylum and special juvenile visas as options the lawyers should consider.
My critic stated, “The right to legal representation for all residents (documented or not) is guaranteed under the Constitution, so it is not the Justice Department offering legal counsel to these young detainees, but the Constitution. Let’s impeach the Constitution for granting rights to all residents.” However, according to the decidedly not-right-wing slate.com:
Attorney General John Ashcroft want[ed] the power to lock up immigrants suspected of terrorism and hold them indefinitely. Wouldn’t this violate the Constitution?
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments…(There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that’s paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide “clear and convincing” evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than “beyond a reasonable doubt”).
The conditions under which these immigrants are traveling to the U.S. are dangerous and dehumanizing. And when they arrive, our government is housing them in overcrowded military barracks and FEMA camps until they can be “processed.” It sounds more like shipping livestock than helping human beings obtain a better life. I see no genuine humanitarianism on the part of the U.S. government in what’s happening in this deplorable situation.
To my critic, sorry, but it’s the fascists who are welcoming these immigrants in order to use them to destroy this country. Despite their humanitarian front, they are wicked to the core and will turn on the new immigrants as soon as they no longer need them. The globalists are turning the U.S. into something it’s never been. If the immigrants knew their plans, they might prefer to stay home.